Riverside County Sheriff's Deputy Aaron Avila wears a body-mounted video camera during his patrol in Riverside, March 19, 2015. Body cameras are at the heart of a dispute between the Riverside Sheriff's Association and Sheriff Stan Sniff over his leadership style.

The union representing Riverside County sheriff’s deputies has pulled its support from Sheriff Stan Sniff and accused him of a dictatorial approach that shunned union input on the deployment of body-mounted cameras and other matters.

The decision, which came after a vote of the Riverside Sheriffs’ Association Board of Directors, means the union does not support how Sniff runs the county Sheriff’s Department, the union wrote in a letter to Sniff dated Thursday, Aug. 13.

In it, the union cites the sheriff’s actions and comments regarding body cameras, pay raises, discipline and take-home cars as why it can no longer endorse him.

The letter signed by union President Robert Masson accuses Sniff, an elected official, of being “unwilling to even recognize (the union’s) legitimate interests in advancing and protecting the welfare of (the union’s) members and our community.”

“Your autocratic engagement style may suit your personal preferences, but it leaves no room for working together with (the union) in a partnership designed to succeed,” the letter read.

Sniff is on vacation for “much of August,” and was not available for comment Friday, Aug. 14, according to an e-mailed statement from sheriff’s administrators.

The statement said Sniff views the union’s action as “unfortunate, but understands there are raw emotions involved in the union leadership’s dispute with the Sheriff’s Department’s decision to press forward with the fielding of body-worn cameras.”

“The sheriff has sought and received input from both employees and outside community sources throughout the (camera) testing process,” the statement read. “The sheriff and county have repeatedly invited the appropriate labor groups to meet on the foreseeable effects of the program, and have in fact already held talks with the other effected (sic) labor groups.”

The county was set to begin formal talks with the union Friday, the statement added.

In a telephone interview Friday, Masson said the frustrations behind the letter have been building.

After Sniff was re-elected in 2014, “he didn’t really need us anymore,” Masson said. “As a leader, you can’t throw members under the bus like he’s been.”

The union, which has more than 2,000 members, isn’t trying to run the Sheriff’s Department, Masson said.

“We have to work together because we serve the citizens of this county, plain and simple,” he said. “We want to make sure we have good policies not just for our members, but for everybody.”

The union might recruit someone to run against Sniff in 2018.

“It’s a possibility,” Masson said.

The union’s letter cites Sniff’s decision earlier this year to require deputies to wear body-mounted cameras that record interactions with the public. Police departments regionally and nationwide are starting to deploy the cameras following increased public scrutiny of officer-involved shootings and allegations of police brutality.

The union sued the county to stop the test deployment because deputies believe that the cameras constituted a significant change in working conditions that required negotiations. Sniff countered that negotiations weren’t required because the cameras were being deployed on a trial basis.

Union officials have said they don’t oppose the cameras in principle. But in its letter, the union contends it was wrongly left out of camera discussions.

“As invested stakeholders in the department’s investigation and decision to deploy devices through countywide operations, the community and the members who will be wearing these devices, should not have been completely excluded from this ‘process,’” the letter read.

The union also objects to Sniff’s announcement of the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California’s support of his camera policy, which “deprived the men and women of the Department of the opportunity to view body-worn camera video,” the letter read.

“Your posture embracing the ACLU while you have ignored the collective voices of the men and woman who will be wearing these devices day in and day out in the field, is an embarrassing insult to (the union’s) dedicated members,” the letter read.

Sniff has said that allowing deputies to view camera footage before making an official statement about an incident could lead them to alter their statements to fit what’s on the video.

The letter brings up other grievances, including Sniff’s repeated statements blaming union pay raises for an increase in what contract cities are charged for sheriff’s services.

“Such ‘increases’ were negotiated at the bargaining table and approved by the Board of Supervisors; a ‘bargaining table’ where you claimed you ‘have no seat,’” the letter read.

“When in truth, there has always been a sheriff’s management representative present at the table. The statement is misleading, and prejudices (the union’s) position in regard to future contract negotiations.”

The sheriff’s disciplinary system is too focused on punishment with overly harsh penalties and department managers “unilaterally implemented” policies regarding the use of take-home vehicles, the letter read.

The department employs more than 4,000 people, including deputies, corrections officers and civilian support staff. Besides policing contract cities and the county’s unincorporated areas, the department runs five jails, serves as the coroner’s office and provides courthouse security.

Sniff cruised to re-election last year and his term expires in 2018. He has been sheriff since October 2007, when the Board of Supervisors appointed him to replace Bob Doyle, who resigned to take a state parole board job.

Jeff Horseman got into journalism because he liked to write and stunk at math. He grew up in Vermont and he honed his interviewing skills as a supermarket cashier by asking Bernie Sanders “Paper or plastic?” After graduating from Syracuse University in 1999, Jeff began his journalistic odyssey at The Watertown Daily Times in upstate New York, where he impressed then-U.S. Senate candidate Hillary Clinton so much she called him “John” at the end of an interview. From there, he went to Annapolis, Maryland, where he covered city, county and state government at The Capital newspaper before love and the quest for snowless winters took him in 2007 to Southern California, where he started out covering Temecula for The Press-Enterprise. Today, Jeff writes about Riverside County government and regional politics. Along the way, Jeff has covered wildfires, a tropical storm, 9/11 and the Dec. 2 terror attack in San Bernardino. If you have a question or story idea about politics or the inner workings of government, please let Jeff know. He’ll do his best to answer, even if it involves a little math.